In a recent email sent to its members, the NAB has conceded that supporters of the XM/Sirius merger "are winning the war of words at the FCC."
Citing Siriusbuzz's FCC Comment Scorecard, the NAB asked their members to not let their members "win the war of words" and to "submit comments to the FCC opposing the merger!"
The NAB even said they are "working hard to derail the merger" but even so, they asked members to "enlist station personnel, friends and family" to aid their cause.
As of June 22nd, nearly 2,600 comments have been filed to the FCC regarding the Sirius-XM merger, and over 2,000 are in favor of it.
If you would like to submit your comments to the FCC, you can do so through the easy to use forms located on both XMmerger.com and SIRIUSmerger.com. They are definitely far easier to use than the FCC's own form.
I smell a rat--How does the NAB know that the majority of comments were postive?? Is it public viewing?
WOW over 2500 people put in a comment on the merger?
With the reported 900,000 Sirius retail share holders and reported 2800 XM retail share holders, its pretty telling. This is something that will effect 14 million subscribers and they only get 2500 comments? With that sort of response I would change Nothing and Deny the merger, But I am anti merger anyway. (and refusing to drink the kool aid)
boy its really sad what the nab has been doing
i have read many filings from the nab on their positions on all types of issues at the root of them all. is a self serving interest in each issue.. the public needs to look deeper at all the nab says.then file a comment requesting this time the fcc act directly in the publics interest and not on behalf of the nab....which has never done a single thing for the consumer.. the truth needs to be told
todays radio is a direct result of all the nabs past actions and filings that were based on the public interest.??
boy thats a sad thought.
With a dolt like Rehr in place, that isn't too hard. Frankly I think the NAB overplayed it's hand, and got way too obnoxious. I didnt care about the merger one way or another (XM user) but it would be great to have it happen just to stick to the NAB.
As a Sirius/Stern sub, aside from MLB, XM has nothing I'm interested in and Mel allayed all of my interoperability and content concerns early on.
But mostly thanks to the NAB, I've been solidly pro-merger for a while. What a bunch of scumbags. I hope terrestrial radio suffers the same well-deserved painful death the music industry is currently experiencing.
Assholes.
This is ridiculous. You have Sirius and XM trying to create a monopoly, and NAB is the bad guy?
This isn't about NAB. This is about Karmazin wanting to take control of satellite radio and turn it into terrestrial. For some reason, a large proportion of those commenting are unable to see the obvious. Too much Sirius koolaid, or whatever, it is nuts.
Creation of a satellite radio monopoly is not good for consumers. How on earth can you people believe it is?
From FMQB... kinda puts a hole in that peskey RIAA lawsuit ... Don't it?
Major Labels Back File Sharing Service Qtrax
June 25, 2007
Brilliant Technologies will soon announce plans to spin out Qtrax, an online record label and file sharing service. What's more, the service is reportedly backed by all four major labels, and it will offer between 20 million and 30 million copyrighted songs at its launch in October, according to the New York Post. The deal is expected to be formally announced today.
The plan is that Qtrax will serve as an online-only record label that will offer its music for free. It will generate revenue only through advertising and sponsorships. Qtrax also will offer a full complement of songs from the major labels - EMI, Sony BMG, Universal Music Group and Warner Music Group - as well as live recordings and personal tracks stemming from users' own collections.
"Consumers clearly aren't willing to pay for music, but advertisers are the one group that still will," Brilliant Technologies CEO Allan Klepfisz told the Post, adding that Internet advertising is growing by 30 percent per year.
Qtrax's initial revenue projections range from a low of $20 million to a high of $175 million. Record labels will get an equal split of the advertising revenue in addition to royalty fees. The file sharing service also will be a publicly traded company, with shareholders in Brilliant Technologies owning 80 percent and 20 percent being offered to the public.
I don't think monopoly means what you think it means.
Is comcast a monopoly because they are my only choice for cable television?
StackPointer, let me try this explanation...
In reality (and especially for people who think like you seem to) we have 2 satellite radio monopolies TODAY. If XM makes changes and upsets you, you can't say, "Fine, I'll go to Sirius!" because you already know that you hate the Sirius way of programming. That is certainly your right, but don't pretend that XM has competition in Sirius that forces it to compete for subscribers. If anything the existing "competition" has forced XM to dilute their diversity in programming and fight for the mass consumer.
The NFL fan doesn't have choices today in satellite, neither does the baseball fan (or SEC fan, or O&A fan, or Stern fan or any of the dozens of exclusive programming that the 2 satcasters carry). The guys who want deeper tracks or more niche-y programming don't have a choice today either. There's a reason that subscribers get (justifiably, IMHO) passionate about their Satellite Radio choice...the 2 companies are very different!
So, yes, without a merger you will still have a choice of which SDARS company to choose; the one you like and the one that sucks! But that's not much of a choice in reality, is it? Post merger, you still have a choice; keep it (if it's still what you like) or dump it (if it becomes what you hate). In my mind, that exactly the same choice you have today.
Is it good for consumers? I guess I'm not convinced we will be better off in a post-merger world. At the same time, I don't think it will lead to reduced choice either.
Thanks, Ryan, for all the space! I know this was too long!
"Is comcast a monopoly because they are my only choice for cable television?
Posted by: buggzy [TypeKey Profile Page] | June 28, 2007 10:25 AM"
Yes.
Who says terrestrial isn't competition? Sounds like the same old stuff they're pulling.
Also, for people who are confused and don't know how to view ECFS filing 07-57, here's a link:
http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/cgi-bin/websql/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.hts?ws_mode=retrieve_list&id_proceeding=07-57
I was one of those who filed as conditional.
I wanted to know what Mel really has up his sleeve should the merger pass.
1) Commercials on music channels? He never said anything on that ...... yet.
2) O&A getting fired? The history is well documented regarding O&A and Mel/Howie
3) What would be the environment of the infrastructure?
I love the idea of having all sports in one service, but some stuff isn't worth trading off.
I don't want the merger because Sirius Just sounds like FM Radio with out commericals. The Programming On Sirius Isn't anything special. Plus Sirius's Dj's talk after ever friken song. I don't want the merger... If it comes, and it stinks, I'll Leave... And Start my own Company. Because when the music programing dies, no one will like it, we will all leave, and Mel will cry.
Nab is the Kool-Aide... Why do you think the people in rural areas and the ag community want (among plenty of other groups) the merger. They need and want the coverage that SAT radio provides and what NAB does not provide. NAB has left those two areas and many more to stand alone out in the cold.
Merger or not SAT radio provides a better community service than any other format!
Monopoly? It would be if SAT radio was your only option and you must use it. If you don't like Sat radio, use another format. It is not a true monopoly if they merge!! You have the NAB to go back to if you like or IPOD or tapes or disc or just watch the birds and listen to nature.
Go merger
FFP450
The other reason XM/Sirius are winning the war of words is because there's so much going on that affects the NAB that they can't really go full steam on any of them without backing off on the others. There's only so many favors you can demand of politicians before they start demanding more capital from you.
What does the NAB have to worry about now? Three really do come to mind:
* RIAA royalties
* Low-power FM
* Satellite merger
If the NAB goes all-out against the merger, they may find themselves having to spend even more on lobbying to stop the RIAA's bid for performance royalties. Indeed, the whole RIAA push for royalties has basically coincided with the satellite merger; the first time that I can recall it being brought up was at one of the Capitol Hill hearings where he asked Rehr while terrestrial should be exempted from royalties that satellite, internet, Music Choice, Muzak, DMX, and the cell-phone operators pay. The NAB thought they had Congress in their pocket, but they miscalculated how much the RIAA wants at least one of a satellite merger (to ensure a continuing flow of royalties from satellite radio) or terrestrial performance royalties and the degree to which the RIAA/MPAA would roll out their guns.
Rehr is trying to fight a 3-front war. He may wish he asked ol' Adolf how tough that can be...
the ria is also figthing whitespace (dtv) devices for handhelds and mobile. portable tv music and entertainmnet which now gm and delphi has joined the open standards group working on the technologie standard..
its worth noting they the (nab) showed their own equipment at ces 2007..
and have now issued a statement (last week) againts the devices,how does any of this serve the publics wants or needs in a digital world
mel started beating the drum on level royalty fees paid by all two years ago when the merger was first brought up...he even made comments in the context of the lables being good partners which seemed odd to me at that time..
xm was sued, radio has been asked to start paying fair rates. all online radio royalty rates skyrocket..
sirius is currently in hearings trying to lower its rates paid, but that would require willing partners..
if satellite gets new lower rates, i would take that as good clear indication the lables have selected a new major partner for promotion. while being paid, which I think is fair if it filters back to the artist and owners.
this is what i think the nab is really fighting for the fees they will be forced to pay shortly due to satrads direct efforts to level the field..
the nab and owners had eighty years to upgrade a really bad public media and refused to do so.
i hope sirius and xmsr are giving the chance by the fcc/doj with guidlines in place to prove they will offer the consumer choice at a very fair price
>>This is about Karmazin wanting to take control of satellite radio and turn it into terrestrial.
There is one reason why this cannot happen. These two services are >optional
Unless they start raising prices and airing commercials on music channels. I am not at my ceiling for what I am willing to pay, but I can touch the ceiling from here. I will have no tolerance if the music channels start selling ads on the music channels. None. Not one minute past the airing of the first one that I hear will I continue to subscribe.
Mel knows this. The boards of both companies know this. Sirius and XM cannot become like OTA radio. It will be the end of both individually or the one combined as soon as they do it. Hell, they can't even sell ads from real companies for the talk channels and sports broadcasts. All I hear about are real estate scaminars and cheap pills for your pecker. Where do you think that they will suddenly get all of this quality ad revenue from.
is embark a monopoly? Their my only choice i have for land phone service.